SWR Class 458 to be retained

[43096]

A shame but based solely on my 458 ride from Vauxhall to Clapham Junction a handful of weeks ago, perhaps it is best to just cut one's losses and get rid of them.

Vauxhall to Clapham Jct is hardly a journey on which to make a sensible assessment!

 

[Goldfish62]

Two weeks ago would have been prior to the submission to the DfT of the Annual Business plan proposals. Now DfT are working through these decisions are starting to be made.

And to add some further context, as reported in Modern Railways, the TOCs are required to present 10% cost savings for the next year.

I would rather projects like this got knocked on the head than more service cuts.

 

[HamworthyGoods]

And to add some further context, as reported in Modern Railways, the TOCs are required to present 10% cost savings for the next year.

I would rather projects like this got knocked on the head than more service cuts.

Indeed and you would hope TOCs would focus on efficiencies like that and keep services.

Which is why replacing the mix of 444s and 450s on the PDL with new rolling stock requiring a whole amount of training costs just surely isn’t appropriate right now with where we are.

 

[Kite159]

What would it mean for the staff at Bournemouth depot as don't the 450s have heavy maintenance at the Siemens depot outside Southampton?

Reduced to overnight stabling/light maintenance?

 

[swt_passenger]

What would it mean for the staff at Bournemouth depot as don't the 450s have heavy maintenance at the Siemens depot outside Southampton?

Reduced to overnight stabling/light maintenance?

I expect it means that staff numbers won’t increase after all. A lot depends on if Bournemouth staff numbers were ever increased for the expected 442s, and if the6 were, whether or not they were kept on after that project was cancelled. Bournemouth hasn’t really been a major maintenance facility since the 442s left the first time…

 

[Big Jumby 74]

Bournemouth hasn’t really been a major maintenance facility since the 442s left the first time…

You beat me to it. Under the 2007 refranchise plan, Bomo West was to be done away with, with stock (444's for the most part) out stabled at Weymouth and Poole. Some of us realised this was a stretch too far, if a reliable train plan was to function day in day out, and although exact detail is now blurred in to a misty past (for me) one of the benefits was the initiative of a good friend and colleague to get the paint shop approved, which did wonders for the 455/456 fleet in more recent times. Also the C shop work on the 158/159 fleet as well. There was a very good reason for 158's going to Lymington.............not only did it resolve the lack of old school 400 series spares available by then, which was making the reliability of the two Cig units become a concern, but it also kept mid week refuelling work in the plan at BM and also kept BM crew traction knowledge on DMU's, a necessity for moving 159s between Southampton and BM for their C exams. There is often more to planning than meets the eye!

 

[DelW]

2017 is irrelevant in this debate, that was a promise made with a previous franchise, that has now been terminated along with all the commitments. As part of the new concession DfT has chosen not to persevere with 2+2 seated rolling stock due to budget constraints. DfT also no longer wish to run 2tph fast to Portsmouth.

I’m not quite sure you understand how the current National Rail Contracts work: they are bluntly based on what the DfT specifies in terms of a cost base.

I'm well aware of what and who is driving all this, but from passengers' point of view it's simply one setback after another, both with stock and timetables. Far from any improvements, the service is now noticeably poorer than through most of the SWT era with a very unbalanced 2tph. At least while allocations are on RTT I can try to time my travel to use 444s, though it's not always possible. I find the wretched cramped seating in the 450s just too uncomfortable for longer journeys.

 

[Goldfish62]

I'm well aware of what and who is driving all this, but from passengers' point of view it's simply one setback after another, both with stock and timetables. Far from any improvements, the service is now noticeably poorer than through most of the SWT era with a very unbalanced 2tph. At least while allocations are on RTT I can try to time my travel to use 444s, though it's not always possible. I find the wretched cramped seating in the 450s just too uncomfortable for longer journeys.

I can understand your disappointment.

 

[HamworthyGoods]

I can understand your disappointment.

I'm well aware of what and who is driving all this, but from passengers' point of view it's simply one setback after another, both with stock and timetables. Far from any improvements, the service is now noticeably poorer than through most of the SWT era with a very unbalanced 2tph. At least while allocations are on RTT I can try to time my travel to use 444s, though it's not always possible. I find the wretched cramped seating in the 450s just too uncomfortable for longer journeys.

The timetable changed next week to give a more balanced service on the PDL but with the same number of services overall. I know SWR have tried quite hard to deliver this within the same cost base. The service at places like Petersfield will be far closer to half hourly than it’s is currently. Not ideal but a step forward.

 

[Nicholas Lewis]

There is some truth to that "internal e-mail". The 458 refurb programme has been paused, but it is due to funding no longer being mad available for the conversion and not because of corrosion (Which was addressed when they were converted to five cars). With the potential surplus of 701s when fully in service there will be no need for the 458s as 450s will be able to cover the Portsmouth routes. The current 458s will remain on lease until the end of 2024 when a final decision will be made whether to resurrect the refurb project, or withdraw the units. The two four car conversions currently at Widnes will be returned to SWR for them to decide how to use them. Incidentally the 455s will also remain on lease until the end of 2024 which gives you some confidence (or lack of) about how long the introduction of the 701s might take. The 455s being withdrawn when there are 701s available to enter service.

As many of us have been forecasting for years this was always the inevitable outcome with ridership so reduced. The 444's should be reallocated to at least cover the fast pompies all day.

 

[jackot]

I'm well aware of what and who is driving all this, but from passengers' point of view it's simply one setback after another, both with stock and timetables. Far from any improvements, the service is now noticeably poorer than through most of the SWT era with a very unbalanced 2tph. At least while allocations are on RTT I can try to time my travel to use 444s, though it's not always possible. I find the wretched cramped seating in the 450s just too uncomfortable for longer journeys.

There seems to be a vicious cycle at the moment in general with the railways; less passengers, less revenue, not enough revenue for new stock or general improvements, worse passenger experience, less passengers; and there doesn't seem to be an easy way to fix it.

It seems to me that SWR really don't have a great record for introducing new stock, even if not all the issues are their fault - 442s refurbished then sent to scrap, 701s not looking to enter passenger service this millennia by the looks of things, and now the 458s. The only new stock they have managed to introduce are the 484s, but with Vivarail in administration that is not looking promising either. Not a great image for SWR, but I understand that when forced to cut costs by 10%, scrapping the 458 refurbishment when they supposedly have an excess of other trains makes the most sense sense financially. What the accountants don't seem to account for though is the worse passenger experience that the 450s give over the 444s or the 458s, making the idea of travelling by rail even less appealing.

 

[physics34]

Been a farce for a long time on that side. Retractioning over a 100 x 455s for just 3/4 years use... very barmy!

Starting, promoting and then cancelling this project once was bad enough. Twice is a farce. Thankfully only two units were worked on this time.

 

[Goldfish62]

Been a farce for a long time on that side. Retractioning over a 100 x 455s for just 3/4 years use... very barmy!

3-4 years? The retractioning started in 2014 and was projected to get up to another 10 years out of the units, which it will!

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 9 Dec 2022 ==

The timetable changed next week to give a more balanced service on the PDL but with the same number of services overall. I know SWR have tried quite hard to deliver this within the same cost base. The service at places like Petersfield will be far closer to half hourly than it’s is currently. Not ideal but a step forward.

Yes, it's certainly better. Running the Haslemere terminator as a fast service never made sense.

 

[HamworthyGoods]

As many of us have been forecasting for years this was always the inevitable outcome with ridership so reduced. The 444's should be reallocated to at least cover the fast pompies all day.

There aren’t enough to cover all the fast Portsmouth’s unless you start using 450s on the Weymouths.

 

[Bletchleyite]

There aren’t enough to cover all the fast Portsmouth’s unless you start using 450s on the Weymouths.

One of each on both (with the 444 continuing to Weymouth from Bournemouth)? It looks a bit rubbish, but as per mix and match 350s it provides capacity, and people making shorter journeys won't care about the less comfortable 450 seating.

 

[HamworthyGoods]

One of each on both (with the 444 continuing to Weymouth from Bournemouth)? It looks a bit rubbish, but as per mix and match 350s it provides capacity, and people making shorter journeys won't care about the less comfortable 450 seating.

Or how about 10-444 on the Bournemouths and one of each on the Portsmouth’s as 9 cars. That seems more logical.

 

[Benno]

Been a farce for a long time on that side. Retractioning over a 100 x 455s for just 3/4 years use... very barmy!

The re-tractioning of the 455s to AC traction was solely financed by Porterbrook as a method of extending their life on SWT. First then took over the SWR franchise and ordered total fleet replacement for the Metro routes making the £70M investment a waste of time and money.

 

[Nicholas Lewis]

There aren’t enough to cover all the fast Portsmouth’s unless you start using 450s on the Weymouths.

They must be able to turn out 40 units a day so 20 pairs but that won't be enough to cover both service groups entirely of course but if there was only hourly fasts on each line might be doable.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 9 Dec 2022 ==

The re-tractioning of the 455s to AC traction was solely financed by Porterbrook as a method of extending their life on SWT. First then took over the SWR franchise and ordered total fleet replacement for the Metro routes making the £70M investment a waste of time and money.

Well by the time they finally go they will have got there moneys worth out of them

 

[HamworthyGoods]

They must be able to turn out 40 units a day so 20 pairs but that won't be enough to cover both service groups entirely of course but if there was only hourly fasts on each line might be doable.

The Bournemouth line has recovered much better than the Portsmouth line. 2 fasts on the Bournemouth route is still required.

 

[Goldfish62]

The re-tractioning of the 455s to AC traction was solely financed by Porterbrook as a method of extending their life on SWT. First then took over the SWR franchise and ordered total fleet replacement for the Metro routes making the £70M investment a waste of time and money.

They were going to be replaced irrespective of who won the franchise. The reason for retractioning was not life extension, but to reduce maintenance requirements so the 707s could be acquired without the need to expand Wimbledon depot. The retractioning, which started in 2014 assumed another 10 years life for the units. That's what they're going to get, unintentionally. Therefore that £70m investment is not a waste of money.

 

[Nicholas Lewis]

The Bournemouth line has recovered much better than the Portsmouth line. 2 fasts on the Bournemouth route is still required.

I guess there is better traffic spread across the day along that route whereas pompy direct was more leveraged to the commuter traffic.

 

[Benno]

They were going to be replaced irrespective of who won the franchise. The reason for retractioning was not life extension, but to reduce maintenance requirements so the 707s could be acquired without the need to expand Wimbledon depot. The retractioning, which started in 2014 assumed another 10 years life for the units. That's what they're going to get, unintentionally. Therefore that £70m investment is not a waste of money.

That's not the case as the 701s should have been in service by now, and all 455s should have been scrapped two years ago, which gives 6 years maximum life based on future total fleet replacement. Porterbrook invested the money in re-tractioning and will not make that money back by the time they are finally removed from service. Although the fact that the lease keeps getting extended is good for their business.

 

[Goldfish62]

That's not the case as the 701s should have been in service by now, and all 455s should have been scrapped two years ago, which gives 6 years maximum life based on future total fleet replacement.

The 701s aren't yet in service and the 455s are being retained until the end of 2024. That's 10 years from when the retractioning started.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 9 Dec 2022 ==

Porterbrook invested the money in re-tractioning and will not make that money back by the time they are finally removed from service. Although the fact that the lease keeps getting extended is good for their business.

Porterbrook stated that the retractioning was based on 10 years life. That's what they're going to get.

My point is based on what's actually happening, not what was meant to happen.

 

[Big Jumby 74]

The reason for retractioning was not life extension, but to reduce maintenance requirements

Exactly so. Without it, there would never have been any 707's, simple as!

 

[Invincible]

They were going to be replaced irrespective of who won the franchise. The reason for retractioning was not life extension, but to reduce maintenance requirements so the 707s could be acquired without the need to expand Wimbledon depot. The retractioning, which started in 2014 assumed another 10 years life for the units. That's what they're going to get, unintentionally. Therefore that £70m investment is not a waste of money.

How many 455s were retractioned before the announcement of SWT losing the franchise. I seem to remember only a few were done?.

 

[bramling]

Exactly so. Without it, there would never have been any 707's, simple as!

Which may well not have been a bad thing, given that replacements were in order at SWR before they even entered service, and now they’re an oddball microfleet at Southeastern.

 

[Big Jumby 74]

replacements were in order at SWR before they even entered service

Looking back and with hindsight, a lot was going on and (as we now know) major changes, such as SWT losing the franchise, were not foreseen of course in the early days of the original 10 car suburban plans. These very complex plans, once commenced, will often continue to their natural (originally planned) conclusion, even if during the transition period other (as said) major changes come about for whatever reason. One contractural document relating to the first part (458 conversion to 5 car and proposed usage there of etc etc) is dated December 2011, and I suspect the process for acquiring further 5/10 car new build stock (707's) followed on very shortly after that. I can confirm that preliminary unit diagrams for that 'new build' stock, which eventually became class 707, had been planned and distributed to those involved in the project during 2013. How far back in time the plan for the 701's/MTR-FG etc were started I have no idea?

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 9 Dec 2022 ==

Which may well not have been a bad thing

Problem with that is, at the time in question the industry was under the restraints of WC1 and 'The Department' to resolve what was at that time unsustainable increases in overcrowding on the suburban network, which was (at some critical locations) crippling timetable performance. The 2004 TT was a very sound reworking (for the most part) of what had hitherto been largely the result of the 1967 electrification timetable, so it might be said that by the early 2010's the SW network had become a victim of its own success? Given the 'Department' aforesaid were stumping up public money for much of this, for the industry to do nothing, was not an option. As said previously, with hindsight, as with many things in life generally, perhaps things may have been done differently, but we are where we are.....

 

[Techniquest]

Vauxhall to Clapham Jct is hardly a journey on which to make a sensible assessment!

Well quite, if I was doing a thorough look at them, I wasn't planning on making that journey from Vauxhall to Clapham Junction. I like 458s, they were a favourite EMU type way back in the early 2000s on journeys to Thorpe Park. Now though, I'd prefer something more reliable and modern.

 

[387star]

To be fair it's not too bad
444s are fairly common and 450s when quiet are so so

Weirdly tables aren't fitted except to seat backs in standard. A 377 seating configuration could work well

 

[Goldfish62]

Looking back and with hindsight, a lot was going on and (as we now know) major changes, such as SWT losing the franchise, were not foreseen of course in the early days of the original 10 car suburban plans. These very complex plans, once commenced, will often continue to their natural (originally planned) conclusion, even if during the transition period other (as said) major changes come about for whatever reason. One contractural document relating to the first part (458 conversion to 5 car and proposed usage there of etc etc) is dated December 2011, and I suspect the process for acquiring further 5/10 car new build stock (707's) followed on very shortly after that. I can confirm that preliminary unit diagrams for that 'new build' stock, which eventually became class 707, had been planned and distributed to those involved in the project during 2013.

The saga of 10 car trains on the SW suburban network goes back further, to the 32 450/2s which were ordered and subsequently cancelled. These were to be 5-car standard only, but the funding was not agreed for the infrastructure alterations. These units eventually emerged as 350s and an additional 10 x 450.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 11 Dec 2022 ==

How far back in time the plan for the 701's/MTR-FG etc were started I have no idea?

I'm led to understand that the required ridiculously tight deadline for service entry as specified by the DfT required bidders to pre-order their preferred new rolling stock for Class 455/456 replacement ahead of the franchise award being announced. One consequence of this is that ASLEF could not be consulted on cab design and we ended up with "cab-gate".